A couple of years ago I had a chance to chat with Linda Greenhouse, the superb New York Times reporter who covers the Supreme Court.

She was giving a talk (for free) as featured speaker at a legal aid fund raiser and I spent a few minutes with her at the reception.

I was curious why the justices are so resistant to having their proceedings televised.

It seems like such an anachronism in this digital age — especially with proceedings in appellate courts that, unlike some trial court case, have no obvious privacy, fair trial or other due process implications.

She said it had to do with their sense of personal security. I took that to mean that the justices deal with such emotional and explosive social issues that they preferred to limit (to the extent they can) their likeness being spread across mass media.

This came to my mind when I read the Supreme Court’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, and how narrowly the conservative court majority tailored the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms, pretty much restricting it to one’s home.

Mr. Dooley (fictional Irish bartender and protagonist in Finley Peter Dunne’s brilliant turn of the 19th century newspaper satire) famously remarked how “th’ supreme court follows th’ iliction returns.”

Could be the justices also read the police blotter.